1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 29 March 2021 b. Date Received: 10 June 2021 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The current characterization of service for the period under review is uncharacterized. The applicant requests, through counsel, an upgrade to honorable or general (under honorable conditions). The applicant's counsel seeks relief contending, in effect, the applicant's discharge is inequitable because uncharacterized discharges for non-citizens like the applicant are treat by other federal agencies as derogatory. The applicant is suffering the adverse consequences from his discharge status (due to medical reasons) that the Army did not intend. The applicant joined the Army through the Military Accessions Vital to the National Interest (MANVI) program and the Board has previously voted to upgrade the uncharacterized discharges of other non-citizen MAVNI veterans. The applicant's discharge is restricting him from his ability to be naturalize and thus reenlist in the Army or serve in another branch of the military. The applicant's counsel request the board consider the applicant's service in the USAR. In a telephonic appearance conducted on 13 September 2021, and by a 4 - 1 vote, the Board the Board determined that the discharge was improper based on his diagnosis of white coat hypertension, in which the applicant's blood pressure is normal except when being checked by a doctor. Therefore, the applicant should not have been discharged at all, making the discharge improper. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to Honorable. Please see Section 10 of this document for more detail regarding the Board's decision. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Failed Medical / Physical / Procurement Standards / AR 635-200 / Chapter 5-11 / JFW / RE-3 / Uncharacterized b. Date of Discharge: 15 June 2016 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSBD) convened: 31 May 2016 (2) EPSBD Finding: The findings of the evaluating physicians indicate the applicant was medically unfit for appointment or enlistment in accordance with current medical fitness standards and in the opinion of the evaluating physicians the condition existed prior to service. The applicant was diagnosed with essential (primary) hypertension. The applicant denies history of cardiac disease or hypertension and stated he felt fine. While undergoing examination by Preventive medicine services for positive PPD and was noted to have elevated BP and referred to PES for BP screening. EKG and labs were unremarkable, serial blood pressure readings averaged 161/91. The provider recommended the applicant be separated for failure to meet medical procurement standards (3) Date Applicant Reviewed and Concurred with the Findings, and Requested to be discharged from the Army without delay: 6 June 2016, the applicant concurred with the proceedings and requested to be retained on active duty. (4) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 9 June 2016 / NIF 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 21 October 2015 / 8 years (USAR) b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 35 / Master's Degree / NIF c. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, May 2016 - 15 June 2016 / UNC (Concurrent Service) d. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None / None e. Awards and Decorations: None f. Performance Ratings: NA g. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: NIF h. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None i. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, Applicant's letter, Timeline document, Memorandum in Support of Application for Discharge Characterization Upgrade, Information on the MAVNI program, Letters of Support-12, medical documents, Request for Certification of Military or Naval Service, Resume, Master of Science in Mathematical Science Degree Certificate, Bachelor of Science Degree Certificate, Report of Evaluation of Educational Credentials. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant secured part-time employment as an adjunct instructor and tutor and later a full-time visiting instructor at FIU. 7. STATUTORY, REGULATORY AND POLICY REFERENCE(S): a. Section 1553, Title 10, United States Code (Review of Discharge or Dismissal) provides for the creation, composition, and scope of review conducted by a Discharge Review Board(s) within established governing standards. As amended by Sections 521 and 525 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, 10 USC 1553 provides specific guidance to the Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards when considering discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), sexual trauma, intimate partner violence (IPV), or spousal abuse, as a basis for discharge review. The amended guidance provides that Boards will include, as a voting board member, a physician trained in mental health disorders, a clinical psychologist, or a psychiatrist when the discharge upgrade claim asserts a mental health condition, including PTSD, TBI, sexual trauma, IPV, or spousal abuse, as a basis for the discharge. Further, the guidance provides that Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards will develop and provide specialized training specific to sexual trauma, IPV, spousal abuse, as well as the various responses of individuals to trauma. b. Multiple Department of Defense Policy Guidance Memoranda published between 2014 and 2018. The documents are commonly referred to by the signatory authorities' last names (2014 Secretary of Defense Guidance [Hagel memo], 2016 Acting Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Carson memo], 2017 Official Performing the Duties of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Kurta memo], and 2018 Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Wilkie memo]. (1) Individually and collectively, these documents provide further clarification to the Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records when considering requests by Veterans for modification of their discharge due to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Liberal consideration will be given to Veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on matters relating to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations that document a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment potentially contributed to the circumstances resulting in a less than honorable discharge characterization. Special consideration will also be given in cases where a civilian provider confers diagnoses of a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harasment if the case records contain narratives supporting symptomatology at the time of service or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment existed at the time of discharge might have mitigated the misconduct that caused a discharge of lesser characterization. (2) Conditions documented in the service record that can reasonably be determined to have existed at the time of discharge will be considered to have existed at the time of discharge. In cases in which a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment may be reasonably determined to have existed at the time of discharge, those conditions will be considered potential mitigating factors in the misconduct that caused the characterization of service in question. All Boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a less than Honorable characterization of service. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD, PTSD-related conditions due to TBI or sexual assault/harassment as causative factors in the misconduct resulting in discharge will be carefully weighed against the severity of the misconduct. PTSD is not a likely cause of premeditated misconduct. Caution shall be exercised in weighing evidence of mitigation in all cases of misconduct by carefully considering the likely causal relationship of symptoms to the misconduct. c. Army Regulation 15-180 (Army Discharge Review Board), dated 25 September 2019, sets forth the policies and procedures under which the Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to review the character, reason, and authority of any Servicemember discharged from active military service within 15 years of the Servicemember's date of discharge. Additionally, it prescribes actions and composition of the Army Discharge Review Board under Public Law 95-126; Section 1553, Title 10 United States Code; and Department of Defense Directive 1332.41 and Instruction 1332.28. d. Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. (1) Chapter 3, Section II provides the authorized types of characterization of service or description of separation. (2) Paragraph 3-7a states an Honorable discharge is a separation with honor and is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. (3) Paragraph 3-7b states a General discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions and is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. (4) Paragraph 5-11 specifically provides that Soldiers who were not medically qualified under procurement medical fitness standards, when accepted for enlistment, or who became medically disqualified under these standards prior to entry on active duty or active duty training or initial entry training will be separated. A medical proceeding, regardless of the date completed, must establish that a medical condition was identified by appropriate medical authority within six months of the Soldier's initial entrance on active duty, that the condition would have permanently or temporarily disqualified the Soldier for entry into the military service had it been detected at that time, and the medical condition does not disqualify the Soldier from retention in the service under the provisions of AR 40-501, Chapter 3. (5) The characterization of service for Soldiers separated under this provision of the regulation will normally be honorable. However, for Soldiers in entry-level status, it will be uncharacterized. AR 635-200 states that a Soldier is in an entry-level status if the Soldier has not completed more than 180 days of creditable continuous active duty prior to the initiation of separation action. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The Army Discharge Review Board considers applications for upgrade as instructed by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant requests, through counsel, an upgrade to honorable or general (under honorable conditions). The proceedings of the EPSB revealed the applicant had a medical condition which was disqualifying for enlistment and existed prior to entry on active duty. These findings were approved by competent medical authority and the applicant agreed with the findings and proposed action for administrative separation from the Army. The applicant's counsel contends the applicant's discharge is inequitable because uncharacterized discharges for non-citizens like the applicant are treat by other federal agencies as derogatory and the applicant is suffering the adverse consequences from his discharge status (due to medical reasons) that the Army did not intend. However, an uncharacterized discharge is neither positive nor negative and it is not meant to be a negative reflection of a Soldier's military service. It merely means that the Soldier has not been in the Army long enough for his or her character of service to be rated as honorable or otherwise. The applicant joined the Army through the MANVI program and the Board has previously voted to upgrade the uncharacterized discharges of other non-citizen MAVNI veterans. However, the method in which another Soldier's case was handled is not relevant to the applicant's case. Applicable regulations state that each case must be decided on an individual basis considering the unique facts and circumstances of that particular case. The applicant's discharge is restricting him from his ability to be naturalize and thus reenlist in the Army or serve in another branch of the military. Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Based on Army Regulation 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table, the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of "3." There is no basis upon which to grant a change to the reason or to the RE code. An RE Code of "3" indicates the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist. If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. The applicant's counsel request the board consider the applicant's service in the USAR. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. The applicant is to be commended for his accomplishments. 9. DOCUMENTS / TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE: In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered the additional documents and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. a. The applicant submitted the following additional documents: On 8 September 2021, 5 days prior to the hearing, the applicant's counsel provided: a 13-page "Supplemental Memorandum in Support of Applicant's Request for Discharge Characterization Upgrade," a 6- page request for upgrade dated 10 March 2021, 2-page Timeline, a 17-page MAVNI program briefing, 15-pages of character statements, 9-page post discharge medical exam (including a diagnosis of white coat hypertension), and 6-page N-426 certification of military service, and curriculum vitae and diplomas that were added to the case file and conidered by the Board. b. The applicant presented the following additional contentions: Applicant, character witnesses, and counsel provided oral arguments in support of the contentions they provided in their written submissions and in support of their documentary evidence c. Counsel / Witness: 10. BOARD DISCUSSION AND DETERMINATION: a. As directed by the 2017 memo signed by A.M. Kurta, the board considered the following factors: (1) Did the applicant have a condition or experience that may excuse or mitigate the discharge? N/A. The applicant was not discharged for misconduct, so there is no misconduct to which the ADRB can apply liberal consideration to excuse or mitigate. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? N/A. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? N/A. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? N/A. b. Response to Contentions: (1) The applicant's counsel contends the applicant's discharge is inequitable because uncharacterized discharges for non-citizens like the applicant are treat by other federal agencies as derogatory and the applicant is suffering the adverse consequences from his discharge status (due to medical reasons) that the Army did not intend. The Board understands this, but the ADRB does have a policy to upgrade uncharacterized discharges for the purposes of obtaining citizenship. (2) The applicant's counsel contends the applicant joined the Army through the MANVI program and the Board has previously voted to upgrade the uncharacterized discharges of other non-citizen MAVNI veterans. However, the method in which another Soldier's case was handled is not relevant to the applicant's case. Applicable regulations state that each case must be decided on an individual basis considering the unique facts and circumstances of that particular case. (3) The applicant's counsel contends the discharge is restricting him from his ability to be naturalize and thus reenlist in the Army or serve in another branch of the military. The Board took this into consideration, as well as the Army MAVNI liaison not informing the applicant of required naturalization appointment, as required. c. The Board determined that the characterization of service was improper based on the applicant's diagnosis of white coat hypertension. The medical documents provided by the applicant make it clear that his blood pressure is fine, and only increases in the presence of medical providers. Therefore, there was no reason for the applicant to have been discharged in the first place. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant has been diagnosed with white coat hypertension, and should not have been discharged at all. Thus the prior characterization is no longer appropriate. (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant's reason for discharge or accompanying SPD code, as the reason the applicant was discharged was both proper and equitable. (3) The RE code will not change, as the current code is consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason / SPD Code to: No Change d. Change RE Code to: No Change e. Change Authority to: No Change Authenticating Official: Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave AMHRR - Army Military Human Resource Record BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge BH - Behavioral Health CG - Company Grade Article 15 CID - Criminal Investigation Division ELS - Entry Level Status FG - Field Grade Article 15 GD - General Discharge HS - High School HD - Honorable Discharge IADT - Initial Active Duty Training MP - Military Police MST - Military Sexual Trauma N/A - Not applicable NCO - Noncommissioned Officer NIF - Not in File NOS - Not Otherwise Specified OAD - Ordered to Active Duty OBH (I) - Other Behavioral Health (Issues) OMPF - Official Military Personnel File PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder RE - Re-entry SCM - Summary Court Martial SPCM - Special Court Martial SPD - Separation Program Designator TBI - Traumatic Brain Injury UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions VA - Department of Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20210009934 3